The CHAIRMAN. What disposition will you make of the discarded Krags?

Admiral MASON. We will hold them in reserve for auxiliary cruisers and things of that sort until they are no longer necessary, and then they will be condemned and sold as obsolete ordnance material. We are compelled to sell all this material at public auction, and very often there is a combination made among the purchasers, and they will drive anybody out that is not with them.

Mr. HOBSON. Will you give any of these to the naval reserves? Admiral MASON. I think if you are going to have a naval reserve at all, they should have the same guns that the navy has. You are going to teach them to shoot, and you are going to call on them in an emergency, and when you call on them and they come out you do not want them to be in the condition that the militia were in during the Spanish war. It happened in the Spanish war, not with the naval militia, but with the militia in the army, that they came down there armed with guns which fired black powder, while the troops of the Regular Army had smokeless powder, as the Spaniards had, and whenever the volunteer opened up he gave the whole snap away, and he got it. The volunteers simply made targets of themselves.

Mr. HOBSON. Does this estimate include anything for the naval reserves?

Admiral MASON. No, sir; the naval reserves' appropriation is a separate appropriation.

Mr. PADGETT. What would be the wisdom of turning these guns over to your auxiliary?

Admiral MASON. Only holding them as a reserve.

Mr. PADGETT. If you had all of your ammunition and your cartridges and things of that kind manufactured for your new gun, how would the others be available in an emergency?

Admiral MASON. Yes; but with these guns we would turn over the ammunition which we have now.

Mr. PADGETT. But that would become useless in time.

Admiral MASON. In a short time.

Mr. PADGETT. And in case an emergency should arise, you would have in your reserve a lot of guns for which there would be no ammunition available.

Admiral MASON. I would not hold them in reserve any longer than was absolutely necessary.

Mr. PADGETT. It looks to me as though if you substituted them you had just as well go ahead and substitute them entirely and dispose of the others.

Admiral MASON. That is what we want to do.

Mr. PADGETT. I do not see what would be accomplished by turning them over to the reserve and stopping the manufacture of these guns so that these others would deteroirate and become useless.

Admiral MASON. We would only hold them until we could get enough of the new ones to replace them.

The CHAIRMAN. The next is on page 34, "Modernizing turrets: For new and improved gun elevating control for turret guns having electric elevating motors, two hundred and sixty thousand dollars." Admiral MASON. In the first place, that is a new item, and it is for the modernizing of all the battle ships with large turrets down to and including the ones that are now under construction.

The Ward-Leonard system of control now in general use was at the time of its installation the best obtainable, and has given fair satisfaction. With it, however, it has not been possible to hold the guns in continuous aim. In rough water it is still less efficient, even to such a degree as to make it a matter of the greatest importance to install more efficient controllers.

Two other systems of control for electric gun-elevating motors have been devised, with which practically perfect control of the guns in elevation may be had through wide variations of roll of the vessel. One of the these is electrical and the other purely mechanical. The latter system is now installed in the 12-inch turrets of the Minnesota and Virginia; 13-inch turrets of the Kearsage and Wisconsin, and 8 and 12 inch turrets of the New Hampshire, Idaho and Mississippi. This estimate provides for an improved system of control in 104 additional turrets. It is very necessary. We have gone slowly and tried it out on the Minnesota and the Virginia and the Kearsarge and the Wisconsin, and it is quite a radical change in control, and it is going to benefit the handling and control of the guns very much indeed. I consider the appropriation very necessary.

The CHAIRMAN. "For equipment for turret ammunition hoists to increase the rapidity, safety, and reliability of the ammunition supply of all turret vessels authorized previous to the Michigan class, but excluding Amphitrite, Miantonomoh, Puritan, Terror, and Texas, eight hundred and twenty-four thousand four hundred and fifty dollars."

Admiral MASON. The committee will remember the request for modernizing turrets last year, in which the two-stage ammunition hoist was proposed, and the total appropriation amounting to something like $2,000,000.

Mr. PADGETT. You all did not approve that, if I remember. There was a considerable divergence of opinion, if I remember.

Admiral MASON. Yes; but I was going to say, going on, that this system estimated for here is the result of long conference on the different types of ammunition hoists, and the work contemplated under this estimate is new closed flame-proof ammunition cars, to be installed either independently or in conjunction with trunking-in the hoists; new handling-room arrangement, to be fitted together with closed ammunition-hoist cars, either independently or in conjunction with trunking-in the hoists; new and improved hydraulic upper and lower buffers for turret power ammunition hoists, to be installed independently, with closed ammunition-hoist cars and improved handling-room arrangements, or in conjunction with trunking-in the hoists; handling-room trunk automatic doors, being entirely new devices, necessary only for use with trunked-in hoists; new turret ammunition hoist motors of sufficient capacity to enable ammunition to be supplied to the guns at such a rate that the maximum rapidity of fire of which the turret installation is capable may be obtained; automatic ammunition-hoist controllers for all turret ammunition hoists where provision for fitting them has not already been made, to increase the safety and speed of operation of the motors; auxiliary hand hoist for turrets regularly fitted with powder hoists, and for improved controllers and pneumatic or hydraulic buffers for all telescopic chain rammers in service.

This is practically the trunking-in and making perfectly safe of all the ammunition hoists of the turrets of the large guns down to the Michigan class, with the exception of the four large monitors, the Amphitrite, the Miantonomoh, the Puritan, and the Terror, and also of the Texas.

Mr. PADGETT. Does this represent the unanimous consensus of opinion?

Admiral MASON. I think it does.

Mr. PADGETT. There was a divergence of opinion last year. Admiral MASON. I can not tell that, because it is not fully tested I think that the committee should leave that to the Navy Department, with confidence that they will not put in a modified hoist which is not satisfactory. In my opinion, I think this is the best and only way to settle the question.

The CHAIRMAN. Have we not got good hoists now?

Admiral MASON. Open hoists; and they have been complaining of them right along. They will complain of almost anything, but I say the hoists we have now are principally open, the cars are not flameproof, and the shutters are poorly designed.

The CHAIRMAN. Are you having any trouble with them at all, particularly?

Admiral MASON. No, sir; not lately. We have had.

Mr. PADGETT. It was stated last year that there was not a single accident that could be traced directly to the hoists. There were other things that explained the accidents.

Admiral MASON. Yes. As I say, when the controversy was going on over the matter complaints were made. Of course you can have almost as many statements as you have people to make them.

Mr. PADGETT. The question I was asking you was if there had been a consensus of agreement among those skilled in the matter, so that this did represent a unanimity of opinion.

Admiral MASON. I think it will; but we have to do something, and my idea is that the committee should give the Navy Department this amount of money to fix those turrets up, leaving the Navy Department to do it the best way possible.

Mr. PADGETT. Without naming the name of the officer, although it is in the record, it was stated that the open straight hoist that we had was safer and superior to the two-story hoist.

Admiral MASON. The two-stage hoist?

Mr. PADGETT. Yes.

Admiral MASON. I do not know. I have gone through it.

Mr. PADGETT. That is in the hearings.

Admiral MASON. You can get statements from both sides and on all sides of the same question.

Mr. PADGETT. I did not know whether that was the universal opinion or not.

Mr. LOUD. What is your opinion of that single and double hoist? Admiral MASON. We are putting in the two-stage hoist in the South Carolina and the Michigan and the Utah and the Florida.

Mr. HOBSON. But you do not recommend it, do you?

Admiral MASON. Yes. But as I said before, to put the two-stage hoist in these older battle ships where you have got to tear down and take things to pieces, and so forth, and where it will cost $2.000.000 to do it, this way is much better.

The CHAIRMAN. This is not the same idea that you had a year ago, then?

Admiral MASON. No; this idea we came to after my hearing before the committee, in which I said it was going to cost $2,000,000 to trunk in and make these vessels safe with the two-stage hoists. Then after the Senate Naval Committee investigation, or during that investigation, we worked out this trunked-in system, as we call it, and I reported it to the Navy Department, and through them I think there was sent to both committees a modified estimate of something like $800,000 for trunking in. At any rate, I know-or at least I understood that it came up in conference between the Senate and House Naval Committee on the bill, and then it was left off in conference, because at that time there was an adverse report by cable from the Atlantic fleet.

Mr. HOBSON. Admiral, taking account of the useful life of a modern battle ship and the part of that life that has already been lived by the ships involved in this proposed change, do you regard it as valuable to make as extensive a change as this in all those ships?

Admiral MASON. I do, for the reason that for some reason or other— or instead of saying for some reason or other, I will say on account of accidents that have taken place heretofore-a certain amount of confidence has been lost in the present ammunition hoists, possibly not entirely due to the ammunition hoists; but I consider it necessary that these open hoists should be closed up in order to make the turrets more safe and to make these vessels efficient for the several years longer that they will be in service. What I mean by "shortly" is, I consider it necessary to make the change.

Mr. HOBSON. For all of these?

Admiral MASON. For all of those open turrets; yes, sir. I hope that you will let that go through, and let us work out the problem. The CHAIRMAN. "Hand purchases for eight-inch turrets, twentyeight thousand dollars." What are hand purchases?

Admiral MASON. They are purchases for hoisting projectiles and ammunition by hand.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you not do it by machinery?

Admiral MASON. Yes; but in addition to that we should have an auxiliary arrangement for hoisting by hand. All foreign vessels have them, and these vessels have been criticized a number of times because they have not. There are 56 turrets and the estimated cost is $500 per turret.

The CHAIRMAN. The next is "Torpedoes and appliances: For the purchase and manufacture of torpedoes and appliances, one million two hundred and fifty thousand dollars."

Admiral MASON. We have been over the torpedo situation a number of times with the committee. We are still behind in torpedoes. Mr. HOBSON. How much behind?

Admiral MASON. What I mean by "behind" is that we are short. We are very short in torpedoes compared with the number that they have abroad.

Mr. PADGETT. You might not put it in the record, but could you tell us how many you have?

Admiral MASON. I unfortunately left that part of the memorandum behind, but I would be glad to send it to the committee.

think it would be well for me to add to my hearing a statement of the torpedo situation.

Mr. HOBSON. How much have you down there now?

Admiral MASON. We have got a plant started, but they have not turned out any. They want to increase it.

Mr. LOUD. The machinery is not yet all installed, is it?

Admiral MASON. Yes.

Mr. LOUD. That is at Newport, is it not?

Admiral MASON. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. "Mines and appliances: For naval defense mines for mine ship, and for the repair, manufacture, and maintenance of a reserve stock of mines and appliances, three hundred and seventy thousand dollars."

Admiral MASON. We want 300 naval defense mines for reserve and for use on the mine ships. At present we put on board of each battle ship 12 naval defense mines. They, of course, are paid for under the armament appropriation of the battle ships, under increase of the naval armament.

Mr. HOBSON. How much is the charge of those mines?

Admiral MASON. It is 176 pounds of wet gun cotton, with enough dry to set it off; about 1.5 pounds, I think.

The CHAIRMAN. What do they cost, about a thousand dollars each? Admiral MASON. Three hundred thousand dollars we ask for; that is a little over a thousand dollars.

The CHAIRMAN. You say "for the repair, manufacture, and maintenance of a reserve stock of mines and appliances."

Admiral MASON. Is that the way it is put?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Admiral MASON. This item is intended for the repair and manufacture. They probably cost a thousand dollars, and in addition to that we have got to install these mines on the mine ship. The San Francisco is being fitted out as a mine ship.

The CHAIRMAN. How many mine ships have we?

Admiral MASON. Only one. We started in to have the two, the San Francisco and the Baltimore, but I believe the Baltimore is going to be used for other purposes.

The CHAIRMAN. "Torpedo station, Newport, Rhode Island: For labor, material; general care of and repairs to grounds, buildings, and wharves; boats, instruction, instruments, tools, furniture, experiments, and general torpedo outfits, eighty thousand dollars." What is the necessity for that?

Admiral MASON. It is just the growth of the station. It has changed from a torpedo station to a torpedo factory in addition. That is one of the unfortunate things that always comes with an increase in the plant; it costs more to keep it going afterwards.

The CHAIRMAN. There is another item of furniture in there.

Admiral MASON. That is the torpedo station and proving ground and the magazines are the places I want to keep the furniture in. I have talked with the Secretary about that.

The CHAIRMAN. They are making it the rule up there to put all these in one item.

Admiral MASON. Yes, sir; but I think I can persuade Mr. Newberry that it would be rather hard for some other bureau to estimate